Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38865295›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Detection and validation of common noctule bats (Nyctalus noctula) with a pulse radar and acoustic monitoring in the proximity of an onshore wind turbine.

Polina Krapivnitckaia, Jannes Kreutzfeldt, Helge Schritt, Holger Reimers, Carolin Floeter, Michael Reich, Veit Dominik Kunz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Polina KrapivnitckaiaCompetence Center for Renewable Energies and Energy Efficiency (CC4E), Hamburg University of Applied Sciences, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-0255-6817
Jannes KreutzfeldtDepartment of Environmental Technology, Faculty of Life Sciences, Hamburg University of Applied Sciences, Hamburg, Germany.
Helge SchrittCompetence Center for Renewable Energies and Energy Efficiency (CC4E), Hamburg University of Applied Sciences, Hamburg, Germany.
Holger ReimersBüro für Umweltkartierung-Informationsverarbeitung-Naturbewertung (U-I-N), Pinneberg, Germany.
Carolin FloeterDepartment of Environmental Technology, Faculty of Life Sciences, Hamburg University of Applied Sciences, Hamburg, Germany.
Michael ReichInstitute of Environmental Planning, Leibniz University Hannover, Hannover, Germany.
Veit Dominik KunzDepartment of Process Engineering, Faculty of Life Sciences, Hamburg University of Applied Sciences, Hamburg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper presents the results of bats detected with marine radar and their validation with acoustic detectors in the vicinity of a wind turbine with a hub height of 120 m. Bat detectors are widely used by researchers, even though the common acoustic detectors can cover only a relatively small volume. In contrast, radar technology can overcome this shortcoming by offering a large detection volume, fully covering the rotor-swept areas of modern wind turbines. Our study focused on the common noctule bats (Nyctalus noctula). The measurement setup consisted of a portable X-band pulse radar with a modified radar antenna, a clutter shielding fence, and an acoustic bat detector installed in the wind turbine's nacelle. The radar's detection range was evaluated using an analytical simulation model. We developed a methodology based on a strict set of criteria for selecting suitable radar data, acoustic data and identified bat tracks. By applying this methodology, the study data was limited to time intervals with an average duration of 48 s, which is equal to approximately 20 radar images. For these time intervals, 323 bat tracks were identified. The most common bat speed was extracted to be between 9 and 10 m/s, matching the values found in the literature. Of the 323 identified bat tracks passed within 80 m of the acoustic detector, 32% had the potential to be associated with bat calls due to their timing, directionality, and distance to the acoustic bat detector. The remaining 68% passed within the studied radar detection volume but out of the detection volume of the acoustic bat detector. A comparison of recorded radar echoes with the expected simulated values indicated that the in-flight radar cross-section of recorded common noctule bats was mostly between 1.0 and 5.0 cm2, which is consistent with the values found in the literature for similar sized wildlife.

Indexed as

AcousticsChiropteraRadarWindAnimalsEcholocationPower Plants

Identifiers

PMID38865295
PMCPMC11168679

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.